As the population increases it becomes harder for public agencies to meet the already stretched demand for services.

The battle between Victorian public service unions and the Baillieu government is heating up, and the mercury is set to soar.

Enterprise bargaining agreements covering some 200,000 state government employees are expiring and that means one thing: a period of protected industrial action looms.

To what extent do we value the lives of vulnerable young boys and girls?

The pay claims of Victorian public servants fall between the Police Association's 4.5 per cent per year increase and the Education union?s 10 per cent a year over the next three years.

The Police Association has kicked things off with a bang, and the usual mix of unimaginative rhetoric, attempting to woo us with a series of online ads as it strives to win the hearts and minds of Victorians.

Advertisement

Ted Baillieu, Peter Ryan and Kim Wells appear as circus acts. When the clown music stops a sombre and serious voice utters: 'Don't play with the police pay'. Powerful stuff? You be the judge.

This style of dispute resolution has come to characterise the conflict between public servants and governments across Australia.Public service unions argue for greater pay and better conditions and, for the most part, their concerns are valid.

But as the population increases it becomes harder for public agencies to meet the already stretched demand for services. Put simply more money is needed.

There is often little incentive for young professionals to take a public service job. Why would they when they can be paid better in the private sector?

Conversely, governments contend that their coffers are finite and that there is no justification to dip into debt. The revered AAA rating must be maintained.

Indeed the Victorian government is correct to note that the current economic environment is volatile, and as such the treasury must make prudent financial decisions. The state's once strong manufacturing sector is now internationally uncompetitive and is no longer a burgeoning source of tax revenue.

Yet, what is missing from the debate is a serious discussion about the value we as a society place on these services.

Perhaps this is because in a 30-second ad little of any significance can be said; the fault, I would argue, of the public relations firms who believe people respond only to the best catchphrase or jingle.

And so, we are left none the wiser. The real issues are overshadowed by a slinging match of empty platitudes.

However, if we take a moment to consider what is at stake we realise that there are broader questions about the nature of society at play, questions inherently about value.

How then can we determine the value of a public program? If profit is not the motive is it even possible?

Let's take the case of the much publicised "crisis" in child protection. How do we assign value to that government program? In a rather crude manner the question can be rephrased: to what extent do we value the lives of vulnerable young boys and girls?

At a starting salary of $47,000 and a workload that is almost impossible to manage the retention rate of child protection officers is abysmal. Many are having to manage dozens of demanding cases simultaneously. In little time most become not only exhausted but disillusioned.

Can it be said then that we properly value the work of child protection officers?

Or perhaps the case of Victorian fisheries officers who are tasked with maintaining the health of one of our most vital resources. There are literally thousands of kilometres of rivers, lakes and oceans to patrol and monitor. We rely on them to ensure that the fish we eat are healthy and that this will continue to be the case into the future. How many officers would such an undertaking require? At least 150-200. The actual number is barely over 50.

These are but a few examples of public service programs that may be undervalued. If nothing else these examples indicate that we should be having the discussion.

Our failure to identify value within the public service is nothing new. If you look through the pages of the nation's history you soon realise that governments have often accused public servants of being wasteful.

Public service unions have normally responded with highly moralistic arguments. And little progress has been made beyond that, which leads us to the adversarial relationship that we see today.

Now might be the time to pause and discuss the notion of value.

Dustin Halse is a member of the Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University. He is currently writing a history of the Community and Public Sector Union/Victoria.

40 comments

If the public servants don't receive the pay rises they are after, they can always order more printer cartridges!

Commenter

yesplease72

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 7:12AM

yesplease72,

Or they could decide to work to rule. An entirely reasonable response that would get your back up straight away. If they are to be treated as the scapegoats for political failure then they might as well make your fantasy the truth. You won't be laughing then!!

Commenter

lesm

Location

Balmain

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 7:44AM

Public servant is a pejorative term. Public servant = parasite, someone living off the earnings of other people and, except for police and front-line medical staff, contributing nothing

Commenter

Adam Smith

Location

Hurstville

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 7:51AM

My partner told me last August she had achieved her targeted number of 'clients' for the calendar year. I asked what she would do until the end of December and she replied 'write up my reports and go to meetings'. DHS.Imagine a psychologist in private enterprise closing the doors for the year after seeing less than fifty clients.

Commenter

Barraman

Location

Hawthorn

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 7:55AM

"There is often little incentive for young professionals to take a public service job. Why would they when they can be paid better in the private sector?|"Answer: Cash isn't everything. I took a 70% pay cut from working in a white collar job to be literally working in a blue collar job and I haven't regretted it one bit. The thrill of the job is priceless.

Commenter

Screen name (required)

Location

victoria

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 7:59AM

Spot on. It is axiomatic that we expect more and more of fewer (in real terms) people. A classic example is in the health area. We hear everyone screaming for more beds both for emergency critical care and otherwise.However for instance every ICU patient is expected to have a separate nurse whilst more allied technical and support staff are needed. However cost pressures put restrictions on staff levels. With increasing technological demands on staff there would one imagines be less time for up-killing so extra technicians would be needed and in any case we would need trainers for new processes. Just think about the growth in imaging for instance.Years ago we would not have had so much call for bone-density scans, MIR and cat-scans and yet these are becoming commonplace. Nurses have had to become computer whizzes. As patient numbers increase so is the need for doctors and as the state presses to reduce waiting times for patients there are greater needs for clerical staff to process and massage targets.I have recently been in and out of hospital a number of times so I have come to understand and appreciate some of these issues and the pressures that ambos and triage staff have to go through. Patients who might well be patient soles normally are themselves stressed which all adds to the pressures. If one thinks of other departments its easy to appreciate how numbers swell in all departments, as increased accountability means more staff. I know I used to work for the NSW public service in the Arts as a technician.

Commenter

simonj

Location

fawkner

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 8:09AM

Adam Smith. If you understood the reality behind governments you'd know that it is the public servants that run them. They write all new legislation and then implement it. The members of parliament only have to turn up and vote. Without public servants the country would quite literally grind to a standstill... there would be no tax office, therefore no revenue, therefore no new roads or infrastructure. There would be no one to issue you a drivers licence, a passport, give you a medicare rebate.... the list is endless. Anarchy would rule.

Commenter

Michael

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 8:17AM

Adam, so who is going to process your parking fines who is going to look after your next door neighbour's mentally disturbed child who is going to staff the phones to deal with your complaints who is going to keep your water flowing and your drains empty and who is going to advise the minister about your needs and who is going to teach your children, put out your fires and even tear tickets at the Arts centre when you go to watch a production. I suppose the clerical staff that collect and process your hard earned cash are 'parasites' so do not complain about mismanagement because you do not want auditing staff let alone staff to pay your hard-pressed front line people. What absolute tosh!!!

Commenter

simonj

Location

fawkner

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 8:19AM

@ yesplease72

You should realise lesm is right, once the Greens have finished deindustrialising Australia we'll all be public servants, or be unemployed.

Commenter

SteveH.

Date and time

June 16, 2011, 8:27AM

SteveH,

The mainstream parties haven't left much for the Greens to do in that regard!!!

Subscribe to IT Pro

Follow Us

Editor's Choice

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has bolstered Malcolm Turnbull's ministerial duties, handing him greater responsibility for e-government in a push to expand the use of a single digital identity for Australians.

Data

The new roof that spans Margaret Court arena does more than keep out the weather. Built into the gantries that surround the sliding ceiling are Wi-Fi antennas that beam web access to every ticket holder.